Hi.

Guys please stop arguing. I mean there is nothing to even argue about. Crysis 1 is far superior in gameplay to Crysis 2. There is no argument.

You know this to be true. Crysis 1 was far far better. So the argument i saw was that "what is the point of going 10 meters off the path" if there is nothing interesting? Wow. You’re a lost soul my friend. Perhaps one day, a big solar flare will do us all a favour and kill all technology, pc's, tv, radio etc. Perhaps the absence of all the static and distractions on this planet will allow you 5 minutes to think. And then you will realize, damn those guys were right. Crysis 1 > Crysis 2 in gameplay.

comment above me
105% agree
I will argue no more

I am not mad. You are trying to imply it from emotionless text on a computer screen in order to make yourself sound more rational. Keep trying that middle school trick if it makes you feel better about yourself.

The problem is that you have been saying Crysis 2 is a corridor shooter when it is not. It has less choice due to vehicles but it is not a corridor shooter.

And now you are also talking about tactical options in terms of how you can complete objectives. Before, you were only arguing the point that Crysis 2 only has one way to get to an objective. Now you seem to be latching on to something else now that I shot your other point down. Luckily, the examples of having choice and options in regards to actually accomplishing an objective in Crysis 2 are far more plentiful than examples of having multiple routes to an objective.

And I don't care that you like Crysis 1 better. The only problem is that you are criticizing Crysis 2 based on things that are not true. And that is because you are a part of the irrational PC group that is not happy with what Crytek is done, so anything you can say to make them and their game look bad is ok by you, even if it's wrong.

All anybody has to do is look through your past posts and see all the other incorrect claims and inflamatory, ingnorant statements you have been making to tell that for themselves. Taking something off the internet is like taking piss out of a pool.

You clearly are upset, because you're insulting me personally, whereas all I'm doing is explaining why I feel that Crysis is the superior game. Crysis 2 is a corridor shooter that gives the illusion of choice, but anyone who has spent any serious amount of time gaming knows that Crysis 2 is, in essence, just your typical linear console shooter. Been there, done that. And so has everyone else on these forums. Just look at the posts above me. Look at the overwhelming majority of posts in any topic such as this. The truth is there for anyone who wants to see it.

And I'm sorry but you haven't shot anything down. If anything, I've disproven everything you've said. I won't repeat myself here, you can just re-read the past few posts if you need to be reminded. My points about the tactical options in Crysis speak to the main point that I've been illustrating in each post, that being that Crysis 2 has basically 2 options to every encounter (stealth or fight), whereas Crysis has maybe 4-5, varying based on 3 distinct types of terrain and 3 distinct types of mobility (boat, Humvee, or on foot). Even though these are only 2 facets of the same argument, I reserve the right to discuss more than 1 point in my posts. Hopefully that's okay with you

My criticism is not only "true," it's pretty much universally acknowledged by the Crysis community. But for every criticism I've given Crysis 2, I've also praised it where credit is due. If you want to fish through all my previous posts (I'd suggest you spend your time doing something more worthwhile, but hey, it's your life), don't neglect to make note of the many many times that I've said that Crysis 2 is an excellent console game, that it looks fantastic for a DX9 game, and that the new gameplay elements are (mostly) a great addition. My core gripe with Crysis 2 is that it isn't a proper sequel to Crysis, and the examples of restricted freedom that I'm illustrating for you are just part of what makes this true.

Wow now that I look at it from lunarf's POV Crysis 2 actually seems less linear than Crysis 1. Wide area is not the same thing as more gameplay options.

Thanks man. This needs to be shown to every troll on this forum.

There is so much wrong with this post. Crysis 2 being less linear than Crysis 1? Are you kidding me. Jesus, just because in Crysis 2, you can either walk on the left of a street, or on the right of a street, doesn't mean it isn't a mediocre corridor shooter.

Way to misuse the word "troll" as well. Listen, I know this might be hard to comprehend, but somebody who thinks Crysis 2 svcks, isn't a troll. There are people out there who genuinely think Crysis 2 is a crappy excuse for a game. I am one of them.

It's less linear in some ways, for example, vertically.

QFT! You know damn well I'm not a troll, btw.

ITT: people who havnt played crysis 1 trying to say C2 is better

Crysis 1 was definitely better. Crysis 1 just felt more epic. Everything in the game was more epic. The scale was huge and felt real. Crysis 2 is more linear and it is pretty epic at times but its nothing compared to the first. I was disappointed because I thought it was going to be even bigger and better than crysis 1in every way, but it wasn't.

I mean the game is based in New York, one of the worlds greatest cities so it has to be epic right? It never really feels like something big is happening on a grand scale. I'm mean the world is being invaded by aliens and it just doesn't seem that serious in the game. Where are the big alien motherships hovering over the city? Where are the alien bases they set up on the ground? Sure they have the big metal worm thingies and the towers with the virus but its not like the aliens go in their to talk up battle plans and park their gunships and drop ships. Its like the aliens just happen to be there. They just appeared from space. That makes no since. And they are red in this one. Huh? They were blue in the first one.

I was pumped in the first at the end when the aliens sent a signal far into space to call for help. I was like holy **** crysis 2 is going to be epic when the aliens come to earth and their is a massive battle! NOT!! Crysis 2 was fun and all but it wasn't the game it could have been and actually should have been.

You clearly are upset, because you're insulting me personally, whereas all I'm doing is explaining why I feel that Crysis is the superior game.

You have been insulting people who play Crysis on consoles and people who have disagreed with you long before I ever started commenting on what you are saying. Just throwing it back in your face.

Crysis 1 has MUCH more better and dynamic gameplay , but Crysis 2 is also fun. I actually reinstalled Crysis 1 after finishing Crysis 2.

You clearly are upset, because you're insulting me personally, whereas all I'm doing is explaining why I feel that Crysis is the superior game.

You have been insulting people who play Crysis on consoles and people who have disagreed with you long before I ever started commenting on what you are saying. Just throwing it back in your face.

LOL this thread is turning against you fast, my friend. I've never insulted any console players. In multiple "PC vs Console" threads I've posted to defend consoles, because I'm not a PC elitist despite the obvious fact that I am a PC gamer. But you should know that, because you've been scouring old threads for my old postings, right?

You should also know, then, that I don't insult -people- unless they insult me first. I may say an -idea- is stupid, but never the person behind it. Why? Because I'm an advlt.

Anyway, why don't you take a handful of whatever it is you're "throwing in my face," set it down, and think about if this is really how you want to behave. I know that online anonymity makes being a turd-flinger easy and tempting at times, but maybe, just maybe, you're an advlt too? And we can stop acting like children and just agree to disagree.

ITT: people who havnt played crysis 1 trying to say C2 is better

This.

I have played both, crysis 2 is the better game imo. I cannot pin point exactly where I found it to be better, but really Crysis 1 had its corridor moments too, and alot of them. Crysis 2 may be a corridor shooter, but its a fricking good one.

There are evidently many PC gamers out there who need to lie down on a couch and have a cry whilst a psychiatrist makes notes. There is this notion that because the first Crysis brought every piece of hardware on the market to its knees in its day that its sequel should do exactly the same today, this is Idiocy with a capital 'I'.

Game companies exist to make money, hell EVERY company exists to make money, its the way the world works and Crytek are exactly the same. Crysis 1 had a very long development time where the storyline mutated in to what arrived in 2007, but Crysis' story was just a necesary piece of the package, if the game could be sold soley on the strength of its graphics (which it just about was anyway) then Crytek wouldn't have bothered with a story at all. Crysis 1 was Crytek flexing its muscles, showing the world how amazing their engine was, and if they could string a trilogy out of it and get plenty of profit, that'd be great. And so we got an incredibly predictable storyline that no-one would have bothered to complete if it wasn't so darn pretty.

However the best way to make money is to license something that you've already built to other companies who will then build their games on it, spreading the word and generating income. I believe Crytek was under the impression that people would be falling over themselves to get a license to work with Cryengine 2, it didn't work out that way for whatever reason and their flagship game became the most pirated game of the time.

Crysis 1 failed what it set out to do, spark a great movement to Cryengine 2.
So like any good company they learned from their mistakes and tried again. The game was incredibly easy to pirate and with the only channel of distribution being the PC market they couldn't allow that to happen again. They started developing an engine that would allow them to break into the console market where piracy is far more dificult and thus trippled the size of the market they could sell to.

Understanding that winning the audience on graphics alone was impossible (It's still the major sell point for the consoles however). They crafted a story which worked with the rather blasé plot of the first game and managed to create something with intrigue and an epic sense about it.
Now, I hate the actual game-play of the Halo series, but a lot can be forgiven simply because of the atmosphere, the music and the fairly well thought out and fairly original story, (it's just a shame that some of the interesting religious history of the covenant was cut from the final releases).

Crysis 2 makes the best of a bad start and comes up with something that is pretty damn good considering, sure there are a lot of story holes to fill but they're making a comic to bridge the two games and there is a novel which explains things in more detail, treatment the other one didn't get.
And of course they couldn't make a sequel following the original protagonists as the console crowd wouldn't react well to it.

Storyline aside, I can't see why there is so much biching about the graphics! Sure you don't have as much control as you did over the old one but thats fine with me, because Crysis 2 is not like Crysis 1, it's actually a game, I'd rather play it than spend hours tweaking the particle effects.
I think we've forgotten what games are about, to quote Zero Coordination a game is "when you control stuff, which interacts with other stuff which generates fun". Sure Crysis 1 was entertaining but did any of you actualy play it soley because it was fun? No you played it because it looked pretty, it became fun if you were a master of changing suit functions but actual gameplay left alot to be desired.

The gameplay mechanics have been worked on to be more console friendly but have actualy, in my opinion, improved things for the PC aswell. At first I was not a fan of the new Nano-suit but in hindsight it actualy isn't that bad, it requires some more thought to use properly than the old one (I just miss maximum speed). We have a much wider and more interesting array of weapons and the way that you move around the maps is great. If you look round, there are far more ways to come at things than the original Crysis; Something about the ledgegrab, suit customization and slide mechanics just appeal to me, it's a much more fun game to play (minus destruction (but that can't be helped), and throwing things).

Crysis 2 manages to look very pretty indeed whilst being very nicely optimized, PC Gamers should be happy that we have a directx 9 game that looks this good and can be run happily on extreme on a computer that struggled to handle the original on high.
IT LOOKS BETTER IN MANY RESPECTS THAN ITS PREDECESSOR AND YOUR bichING BECAUSE YOU CAN'T bich ABOUT NOT BEING TO PLAY IT ON THE HIGEST SETTING! (if you don't agree, play C1 and look at the tail gate of the VTOL, now compare it to the VTOL gate in C2, same can be done with Admiral Morison and Lockheart when he comes for you in the cradle).

Crytek have officialy announced that they are working on a Dx.11 patch but are taking their time because they want to eek out the potential of DX.11
Tell me, what other game developer would go to that much bother (and I assure you it is a lot of bother indeed) to create something specificaly to make PC gamers happy? It's a free patch (or better be) so stop your whining!

Multiplayer is actually very fun, sure its taken almost all of its cues from CoD but it has balanced it nicely, there aren't turrets dropping everywhere and the sky isn't always full of attack choppers. People don't take 1000 years to kill as they did in the original Crysis and there is actualy a spread of talent not a few people with poor ping and no hope and a few people with a good ping and practiced ease. Those of you complaining about glitches, I remember playing vanila Crysis and coming across many more bugs in one level than I encountered in C2's entire vanilla campaign, Multiplayer was fixed after a day or two and I don't think I have seen a hacker in my 30 hours of online play.

Both games have their good points and both have their bad, but Crysis 2 is definately the product it needed to be and it will be better in a few months time with this patch. And because of that, Crysis 2 is better than Crysis 1 simply because it achieves its goal, and the goal isn't just to promote the engine and make a few quid on the side, the goal is to create a customer base of people who actually enjoy the game for its game like aspects, not how many specular reflections there are on the water.

So to all of you biching about C2, rather than spamming the forums with your pathetic whimpering please go and either play the original Crysis or visit a Psychiatrist. Crytek have outdone themselves really and have produced something that deserves the 9/10 most major game reviewers gave it.

-Incindre

There are evidently many PC gamers out there who need to lie down on a couch and have a cry whilst a psychiatrist makes notes. There is this notion that because the first Crysis brought every piece of hardware on the market to its knees in its day that its sequel should do exactly the same today, this is Idiocy with a capital 'I'.

Game companies exist to make money, hell EVERY company exists to make money, its the way the world works and Crytek are exactly the same. Crysis 1 had a very long development time where the storyline mutated in to what arrived in 2007, but Crysis' story was just a necesary piece of the package, if the game could be sold soley on the strength of its graphics (which it just about was anyway) then Crytek wouldn't have bothered with a story at all. Crysis 1 was Crytek flexing its muscles, showing the world how amazing their engine was, and if they could string a trilogy out of it and get plenty of profit, that'd be great. And so we got an incredibly predictable storyline that no-one would have bothered to complete if it wasn't so darn pretty.

However the best way to make money is to license something that you've already built to other companies who will then build their games on it, spreading the word and generating income. I believe Crytek was under the impression that people would be falling over themselves to get a license to work with Cryengine 2, it didn't work out that way for whatever reason and their flagship game became the most pirated game of the time.

Crysis 1 failed what it set out to do, spark a great movement to Cryengine 2.
So like any good company they learned from their mistakes and tried again. The game was incredibly easy to pirate and with the only channel of distribution being the PC market they couldn't allow that to happen again. They started developing an engine that would allow them to break into the console market where piracy is far more dificult and thus trippled the size of the market they could sell to.

Understanding that winning the audience on graphics alone was impossible (It's still the major sell point for the consoles however). They crafted a story which worked with the rather blasé plot of the first game and managed to create something with intrigue and an epic sense about it.
Now, I hate the actual game-play of the Halo series, but a lot can be forgiven simply because of the atmosphere, the music and the fairly well thought out and fairly original story, (it's just a shame that some of the interesting religious history of the covenant was cut from the final releases).

Crysis 2 makes the best of a bad start and comes up with something that is pretty damn good considering, sure there are a lot of story holes to fill but they're making a comic to bridge the two games and there is a novel which explains things in more detail, treatment the other one didn't get.
And of course they couldn't make a sequel following the original protagonists as the console crowd wouldn't react well to it.

Storyline aside, I can't see why there is so much biching about the graphics! Sure you don't have as much control as you did over the old one but thats fine with me, because Crysis 2 is not like Crysis 1, it's actually a game, I'd rather play it than spend hours tweaking the particle effects.
I think we've forgotten what games are about, to quote Zero Coordination a game is "when you control stuff, which interacts with other stuff which generates fun". Sure Crysis 1 was entertaining but did any of you actualy play it soley because it was fun? No you played it because it looked pretty, it became fun if you were a master of changing suit functions but actual gameplay left alot to be desired.

The gameplay mechanics have been worked on to be more console friendly but have actualy, in my opinion, improved things for the PC aswell. At first I was not a fan of the new Nano-suit but in hindsight it actualy isn't that bad, it requires some more thought to use properly than the old one (I just miss maximum speed). We have a much wider and more interesting array of weapons and the way that you move around the maps is great. If you look round, there are far more ways to come at things than the original Crysis; Something about the ledgegrab, suit customization and slide mechanics just appeal to me, it's a much more fun game to play (minus destruction (but that can't be helped), and throwing things).

Crysis 2 manages to look very pretty indeed whilst being very nicely optimized, PC Gamers should be happy that we have a directx 9 game that looks this good and can be run happily on extreme on a computer that struggled to handle the original on high.
IT LOOKS BETTER IN MANY RESPECTS THAN ITS PREDECESSOR AND YOUR bichING BECAUSE YOU CAN'T bich ABOUT NOT BEING TO PLAY IT ON THE HIGEST SETTING! (if you don't agree, play C1 and look at the tail gate of the VTOL, now compare it to the VTOL gate in C2, same can be done with Admiral Morison and Lockheart when he comes for you in the cradle).

Crytek have officialy announced that they are working on a Dx.11 patch but are taking their time because they want to eek out the potential of DX.11
Tell me, what other game developer would go to that much bother (and I assure you it is a lot of bother indeed) to create something specificaly to make PC gamers happy? It's a free patch (or better be) so stop your whining!

Multiplayer is actually very fun, sure its taken almost all of its cues from CoD but it has balanced it nicely, there aren't turrets dropping everywhere and the sky isn't always full of attack choppers. People don't take 1000 years to kill as they did in the original Crysis and there is actualy a spread of talent not a few people with poor ping and no hope and a few people with a good ping and practiced ease. Those of you complaining about glitches, I remember playing vanila Crysis and coming across many more bugs in one level than I encountered in C2's entire vanilla campaign, Multiplayer was fixed after a day or two and I don't think I have seen a hacker in my 30 hours of online play.

Both games have their good points and both have their bad, but Crysis 2 is definately the product it needed to be and it will be better in a few months time with this patch. And because of that, Crysis 2 is better than Crysis 1 simply because it achieves its goal, and the goal isn't just to promote the engine and make a few quid on the side, the goal is to create a customer base of people who actually enjoy the game for its game like aspects, not how many specular reflections there are on the water.

So to all of you biching about C2, rather than spamming the forums with your pathetic whimpering please go and either play the original Crysis or visit a Psychiatrist. Crytek have outdone themselves really and have produced something that deserves the 9/10 most major game reviewers gave it.

-Incindre

Game companies may exist to make money, but that doesn't mean they can't please their fans while doing so. Crytek shat on their loyal fanbase, just for the sake of money. Crysis 2 is NOT the product "it needed to be". Nobody was expecting a generic corridor shooter. And did you seriously call this game's multiplayer balanced? It had so many imbalances that were only addressed with a recent patch. Even now, I'm sure many imbalances exist, but I'm saving myself the torture of playing this game's multiplayer. Furthermore, this game's multiplayer definitely was not fixed in two days. That's a horribly asinine thing to say. People STILL have trouble with their unlocks saving. People STILL encounter hackers FREQUENTLY. The spawn system is the most god awful thing I've ever witnessed. Pirates could play the multiplayer for over a week after release.

The multiplayer is, in general, an uninspired CoD clone. They removed Crysis 1's unique multiplayer in favor of a generic Call of Duty run-and-gun multiplayer. There's no skill involved anymore. Whoever gets the jump on the other player first will always win. Crytek basically took everything that made Crysis great, and removed it for the sequel. The wide-open environments, the incredibly powerful suit powers, the unique multiplayer, all gone. That's not how you make a sequel.

By the way, is signing your posts really necessary? I can see your name right there, on the top left of of your post. It doesn't make you look professional if that's what you're thinking.

quit biching, and just play the games that you enjoy. There's no need for you to state the same old tired argument that we've been seeing since release day.

1. Linear missions.
Crysis and Crysis 2 are both linear. You don't really get a different mission if you go to E through B or C.

2. Linear worlds.
I agree, C2 is more linear than C1, but C1 is not 100% free roam.

Why? In C1 you have open areas(like a village) connected through several linear paths - you can take any of them. But those paths are really long, which sometimes is very boring.

In C2 you also have open areas, but they are connceted through fewer(or 1) paths. And the "Dead man walking" level is only an open area(withou the Cell building interior).

Also, the level where you drive a car to get to the marines - the road is the path, and the place the marines are is the open area.

3. AI.

In Crysis 1 you also have super-fast reacting AI! At long range sniping you can see it. If you're sniping a NK that is not alerted, he is alerted WHEN YOU PULL the trigger, even before the bullet reachs him! And the other ones around him too! So, Crysis 2 AI is not worse reactiontime-wise.

But yeah, Crysis 1 AI doesn't try hitting trough the wall... so here C1 AI wins.

4. Graphics.

Crysis 2 is better than C1 - just look at the inside buildings graphics of C1 and then C2. But outside... well, in real life a jungle is nicer than a city, right? So C1 wins outside, C2 inside, but C2 is more optimized.

quit biching, and just play the games that you enjoy. There's no need for you to state the same old tired argument that we've been seeing since release day.

Stop discussing Crysis 2 on the official Crysis message board. Jesus guys, what's wrong with you?

There are evidently many PC gamers out there who need to lie down on a couch and have a cry whilst a psychiatrist makes notes. There is this notion that because the first Crysis brought every piece of hardware on the market to its knees in its day that its sequel should do exactly the same today, this is Idiocy with a capital 'I'.

Game companies exist to make money, hell EVERY company exists to make money, its the way the world works and Crytek are exactly the same. Crysis 1 had a very long development time where the storyline mutated in to what arrived in 2007, but Crysis' story was just a necesary piece of the package, if the game could be sold soley on the strength of its graphics (which it just about was anyway) then Crytek wouldn't have bothered with a story at all. Crysis 1 was Crytek flexing its muscles, showing the world how amazing their engine was, and if they could string a trilogy out of it and get plenty of profit, that'd be great. And so we got an incredibly predictable storyline that no-one would have bothered to complete if it wasn't so darn pretty.

However the best way to make money is to license something that you've already built to other companies who will then build their games on it, spreading the word and generating income. I believe Crytek was under the impression that people would be falling over themselves to get a license to work with Cryengine 2, it didn't work out that way for whatever reason and their flagship game became the most pirated game of the time.

Crysis 1 failed what it set out to do, spark a great movement to Cryengine 2.
So like any good company they learned from their mistakes and tried again. The game was incredibly easy to pirate and with the only channel of distribution being the PC market they couldn't allow that to happen again. They started developing an engine that would allow them to break into the console market where piracy is far more dificult and thus trippled the size of the market they could sell to.

Understanding that winning the audience on graphics alone was impossible (It's still the major sell point for the consoles however). They crafted a story which worked with the rather blasé plot of the first game and managed to create something with intrigue and an epic sense about it.
Now, I hate the actual game-play of the Halo series, but a lot can be forgiven simply because of the atmosphere, the music and the fairly well thought out and fairly original story, (it's just a shame that some of the interesting religious history of the covenant was cut from the final releases).

Crysis 2 makes the best of a bad start and comes up with something that is pretty damn good considering, sure there are a lot of story holes to fill but they're making a comic to bridge the two games and there is a novel which explains things in more detail, treatment the other one didn't get.
And of course they couldn't make a sequel following the original protagonists as the console crowd wouldn't react well to it.

Storyline aside, I can't see why there is so much biching about the graphics! Sure you don't have as much control as you did over the old one but thats fine with me, because Crysis 2 is not like Crysis 1, it's actually a game, I'd rather play it than spend hours tweaking the particle effects.
I think we've forgotten what games are about, to quote Zero Coordination a game is "when you control stuff, which interacts with other stuff which generates fun". Sure Crysis 1 was entertaining but did any of you actualy play it soley because it was fun? No you played it because it looked pretty, it became fun if you were a master of changing suit functions but actual gameplay left alot to be desired.

The gameplay mechanics have been worked on to be more console friendly but have actualy, in my opinion, improved things for the PC aswell. At first I was not a fan of the new Nano-suit but in hindsight it actualy isn't that bad, it requires some more thought to use properly than the old one (I just miss maximum speed). We have a much wider and more interesting array of weapons and the way that you move around the maps is great. If you look round, there are far more ways to come at things than the original Crysis; Something about the ledgegrab, suit customization and slide mechanics just appeal to me, it's a much more fun game to play (minus destruction (but that can't be helped), and throwing things).

Crysis 2 manages to look very pretty indeed whilst being very nicely optimized, PC Gamers should be happy that we have a directx 9 game that looks this good and can be run happily on extreme on a computer that struggled to handle the original on high.
IT LOOKS BETTER IN MANY RESPECTS THAN ITS PREDECESSOR AND YOUR bichING BECAUSE YOU CAN'T bich ABOUT NOT BEING TO PLAY IT ON THE HIGEST SETTING! (if you don't agree, play C1 and look at the tail gate of the VTOL, now compare it to the VTOL gate in C2, same can be done with Admiral Morison and Lockheart when he comes for you in the cradle).

Crytek have officialy announced that they are working on a Dx.11 patch but are taking their time because they want to eek out the potential of DX.11
Tell me, what other game developer would go to that much bother (and I assure you it is a lot of bother indeed) to create something specificaly to make PC gamers happy? It's a free patch (or better be) so stop your whining!

Multiplayer is actually very fun, sure its taken almost all of its cues from CoD but it has balanced it nicely, there aren't turrets dropping everywhere and the sky isn't always full of attack choppers. People don't take 1000 years to kill as they did in the original Crysis and there is actualy a spread of talent not a few people with poor ping and no hope and a few people with a good ping and practiced ease. Those of you complaining about glitches, I remember playing vanila Crysis and coming across many more bugs in one level than I encountered in C2's entire vanilla campaign, Multiplayer was fixed after a day or two and I don't think I have seen a hacker in my 30 hours of online play.

Both games have their good points and both have their bad, but Crysis 2 is definately the product it needed to be and it will be better in a few months time with this patch. And because of that, Crysis 2 is better than Crysis 1 simply because it achieves its goal, and the goal isn't just to promote the engine and make a few quid on the side, the goal is to create a customer base of people who actually enjoy the game for its game like aspects, not how many specular reflections there are on the water.

So to all of you biching about C2, rather than spamming the forums with your pathetic whimpering please go and either play the original Crysis or visit a Psychiatrist. Crytek have outdone themselves really and have produced something that deserves the 9/10 most major game reviewers gave it.

-Incindre

I'm not even going to pretend that I read this ridiculously long sh!tpile of a post, but I skimmed it because I just had to know what could possibly be so important that this poster just wrote a 1500 word essay in this thread. Oh, wait... It's all the same sh!t been said ad nauseum by the few Crytek fanboys left who are still trying to convince the rest of the world that Crysis 2 is anywhere near the caliber of game that Crysis and Warhead were (and still are).

Dude, you're welcome to contribute to the conversation, but ffs you really think anybody cares enough about your opinion to read THAT abomination of a post? Keep it short and sweet. This is a conversation, after all. Not a lecture.